the eyes have it
I've been putting things in place to allow me to get laser surgery on my eyes for something over a year now. Today I finally made an appointment to get it done.
In my case, this is not going to be a trivial operation: my myopia is sufficiently extreme (about -12 diopters in each eye; I literally cannot focus two inches in front of my face) that they're going to use two different forms of LASIK (conventional and WaveFront) for the operation, and the chances that I'll have 20/20 vision afterwards, while probably better than 50-50, are not great. Hopefully the benefits will be worth the risk (and the cost)...but if nothing else, I should at least be able to function without corrective lenses, which I simply can't do now.
Crossing fingers...
In my case, this is not going to be a trivial operation: my myopia is sufficiently extreme (about -12 diopters in each eye; I literally cannot focus two inches in front of my face) that they're going to use two different forms of LASIK (conventional and WaveFront) for the operation, and the chances that I'll have 20/20 vision afterwards, while probably better than 50-50, are not great. Hopefully the benefits will be worth the risk (and the cost)...but if nothing else, I should at least be able to function without corrective lenses, which I simply can't do now.
Crossing fingers...
no subject
no subject
no subject
Use lots of drops during the healing. They'll tell you, but you've got to give me something to do here. :)
no subject
As long as my vision is at least 20/40, I'm sure I'll be more or less OK with it. (What can I say?--I'm picky.)
no subject
I thought they couldn't do WaveFront if your eyes were too bad. (They did it on one of my eyes and not the other.)
no subject
As for WaveFront: in fact what they'll be doing to me is 80% WaveFront and 20% conventional, in part because if they'd done all WaveFront then they'd have used more cornea up than they prefer. I'd considered doing IOL/ICL (intraocular/implantable contact lens) but I decided not to for several reasons: it doesn't correct astigmatism (of which I don't have a lot, but enough to be annoying), the potential complications are nastier, they only do one eye at a time (so I'd be half-blind for at least a couple of weeks), and Dr. Tooma hasn't done many of them. (Oh, and it costs a couple thousand more dollars.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
merry late xmas I suppose
good luck w/that.
Re: merry late xmas I suppose
To make it somewhat more concrete: I cannot reliably identify faces at 2 feet; heck, I can't even reliably read my alarm clock's 3-inch-high seven-segment LED display at 2 feet (in the dark, with high contrast). Nor can I reliably see my glasses (from a standing height) if I drop them on the floor. It's pretty much like things look through a telescope, or binoculars, that are as far out of focus as they go--except probably somewhat more so.
On the other hand, I *can* see fine details on objects < 2" from my eyes (although for obvious reasons of geometry, my binocular vision isn't much). I can't focus on anything much *closer* than 6" with my glasses on (don't know how this works for you), so I expect I'll lose the really-close-up detail I can see now with my unaided eyes. But I guess I'm willing to give that up. :)
Re: merry late xmas I suppose
Re: merry late xmas I suppose
As for the presbyopia: as I understand it, you'll be presbyopic eventually with or without LASIK; getting LASIK would just mean that you would need reading glasses rather than bifocals.
As for my experiences: I've now made three post-LASIK posts in my LJ (Google on " "post-LASIK" Joshua" to find the first two); feel free to ask questions in the comments (or to email me).